There are other ways of inducing change blindness of that sort. E.g. the ducking behind a counter version. Yes, the nature of giving directions varies by setting. Different task in Ithaca and Boston.

It's possible. That person change does show an ingroup-outgroup effect, so maybe there would be cultural differences in that sort of connection. I imagine the context (e.g., a person change in a bar) would drive it more than East/West diffs. That's my guess, anyway.

Doubt it, but could be wrong. People are always doing *some* task. If the change is unexpected, it seems unlikely that whatever "task" people are doing will happen to differ by culture in ways that affect change detection. Might differ for deliberate detection tasks because strategies might vary

Here are the DOIs for the handful of ADHD ones we turned up in our preliminary, non-systematic search:
10.1177/1087054711433294
10.1016/j.ridd.2015.12.002
10.4992/pacjpa.73.0_1AM031
doi.org/10.3389/fpsy...

We likely missed some. I haven't read any of these closely yet.

My lab has started a change blindness lit review this semester. Our preliminary search (not systematic) turned up a few papers on ADHD (DOIs in next reply), I haven't examined them for quality. We're starting a systematic review on change/inattentional blindness and autism first.

Will do. The Stage 2 RR is ready to submit now but will be submitted next week (after OSF finishes updating to their new interface). I'll send the meta-analytic review paper and the cultural diffs paper.

But we don't find cultural differences in intentional change detection tasks either: journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....

I wouldn't expect cultural differences for IB (we haven't found those either). I think the same would be true for unexpected changes like the "door." I suspect that individual differences in other cognitive ability measures *are* associated with performance on intentional change detection tasks.

Hi folks. For inattentional blindness, individual differences are limited at best. We did a meta-analytic review and found little or no association with working memory measures, etc. We're about to submit a stage-2 RR also showing little evidence of individual differences in IB.

I don't think I have one. Somewhere in my lab I have an old videotape from Dick Neisser. If I can find it, I'll have it digitized professionally. I don't think the Neisser & Becklen (1975) videos were, though. Maybe @irahyman.bsky.social has that one? Happy to post other variants to my channel.

The original Neisser selective looking video is now posted. The description has lots of details: www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g7a...

@irahyman.bsky.social - if you have some of the other variants, I'd can post them. too. I don't have them handy right now.
@bwyble.bsky.social

I'll try go get that done in the next couple of days if I can.

I used to have it up there. Not sure why I don't any more. For a while, I was handling requests for it for Dick's children, but I haven't needed to do that for a while. I'd be happy to repost it if you think that would be best for visibility.

I'm teaching my grad version of the course again this fall. I haven't started working on the syllabus yet, though. It's my first time teaching it in the LLM era, so that'll be a new challenge. I'd love to see what you're putting together!

Hmm. That's not me :-). might be the other Daniel J. Simons (at Pittsburgh?)

(I also don't review for them for the same reasons)

It used to be a decent journal. Years ago I submitted what I felt was good work and it underwent rigorous review. Haven't gone there for years due to the increasingly iffy approach to review.

It was @cfchabris.bsky.social's blog post by about Dobelli's plagiarism of The Invisible Gorilla in The Art of Thinking (he also cribbed passages from Taleb). Although Chris's blog is down, Dobelli's website lists his "corrections" (www.dobelli.com/book-correct...) @axc.bsky.social